Firstly, whoever wants to have a good read on the topic should get ibnul Arabiyy's (NOT Ibn arabiyy the Sufi deviant) book; al-'awaasim minal qawaasim, Ibn Katheer's bidaayah wa nihaayah and Soheehul Bukharee.

Secondly; Due to my laziness or tight schedule, I am not able to type, instead I have sourced for good article(s) on the topic from the internet.

I pray that Allah makes it beneficial to the OP and everyone who reads and comments objectively.

Now to the discussion;
How do Muslims and Shi'ites differ in understanding the concept of Imamah?

Let us initially define the term Imamah:
In Arabic, an Imam is a person whom others follow, be it who leads the prayer, who heads a group or even the Caliph.
The Holy Qur'an, for instance, is the Imam of Muslims, and so is the Apostle of Allah [saw]. He is the Imam of all the Imams.

Furthermore, the title Imam can be used for one who is an expert of a certain field. To illustrate, it is said that al-Bukhari is an Imam of Hadith, Malik, Abu Hanifah, al-Shafi'i, Ibn Hanbal are Imams in Islamic Jurisprudence, and so on.
Imam may also mean a "role model" as used by Allah [swt]: 2:124. And remember that Abraham was tried by his Lord with certain commands, which he fulfilled: He said: I will make thee an Imam to the people. He pleaded: and also (imams) from my offspring! He answered: But my Promise is not within the reach of evil-doers. i.e., I am making you a role model that others follow.
Another example is His saying [swt]: 21:73. And we made them Imams (leaders) guiding (men) by Our Command. Also as in 9:12. But if they violate their oaths after their covenant, and attack your faith, fight ye the Imams (chiefs) of Unfaith: for their oaths are nothing to them...

Also as in
28:41. And We made them (firaun and followers) but Imams (leaders) inviting to the Fire...

From the above definitions, we can understand the reason why the Khalifah is called an Imam too. Imam Abu Zahra [rahimahullah] explained:

"It was called Khilafah (succession) because whoever assumes it, and is the Grand Governor of the Muslims, is actually succeeding the Apostle [saw] in managing the affairs of the Muslims. It is also called al-Imamah, because the Khalifah used to be called Imam, and because his obediance is compulsory and the people follow him as they follow the one who leads the prayer"
'Aqeedat al-Imamah : Ali Ahmad As-Saloos, PhD, p.9

....continued

Did the Companions ever think as to who will succeesd the Apostle of Allah for their leadership, especially during his last illness?

There are, indeed, few narrations with authentic link of transmittors, that indicate there was such a thinking. Among these Ahadith is that of Ibn Abbas [ra]:

Narrated 'Abdullah bin Abbas: Ali bin Abi Talib came out of the house of Allah's Apostle during his fatal illness. The people asked, "O Abul Hasan (i.e. Ali)! How is the health of Allah's Apostle this morning?" 'Ali replied, "He has recovered with the Grace of Allah." al'Abbas bin 'Abdul Muttalib held him by the hand and said to him, "In three days you, by Allah, will be ruled (by somebody else ), And by Allah, I feel that Allah's Apostle will die from this ailment of his, for I know how the faces of the offspring of 'Abdul Muttalib look at the time of their death. So let us go to Allah's Apostle and ask him who will take over the Caliphate. If it is given to us we will know as to it, and if it is given to somebody else, we will inform him so that he may tell the new ruler to take care of us." 'Ali said, "By Allah, if we asked Allah's Apostle for it (i.e. the Caliphate) and he denied it us, the people will never give it to us after that. And by Allah, I will not ask Allah's Apostle for it."

Sahih al-Bukhari , Volume 5, Book 59, Number 728;
Musnad al-Imam Ahmad vol.4, Narration 2374 & vol.5, Narration 229

There is another Hadith attributed to Ali [ra] with a good Isnaad (link of transmittors) saying:

"It was said: O Apostle of Allah, Who should be installed as a leader after you? He said: If you install Abu Bakr, you will find him honest, ascetic in this life and desirious of the Hereafter. If you install Omar, you will find him strong, honest, fearing in Allah no one's blame. If you install Ali, and I don't think you will, you will find him guided, guiding you to the straight path."

Musnad al-Imam Ahmad: vol.2, narration 859

This, as Dr. Saloos wrote, indicates that the question of succession existed during the life of the Apostle of Allah [saw], but the dispute did not erupt until later on, after he [saw] moved to his final abode, which ended in the meeting, known as "Meeting of As-Saqeefah", with the election of Abu Bakr As-Sadiq [ra].

The second Caliph, Amirul-Mu'mineen Omar [ra] told us what took place in that meeting:
Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:

"I used to teach (the Qur'an to) some people of the Muhajirln (emigrants), among whom there was 'Abdur Rahman bin 'Auf. While I was in his house at Mina, and he was with 'Umar bin Al-Khattab during 'Umar's last Hajj, Abdur-Rahman came to me and said, "Would that you had seen the man who came today to the Chief of the Believers ('Umar), saying, 'O Chief of the Believers! What do you think about so-and-so who says, 'If 'Umar should die, I will give the pledge of allegiance to such-and-such person, as by Allah, the pledge of allegiance to Abu Bakr was nothing but a prompt sudden action which got established afterwards.' 'Umar became angry and then said, 'Allah willing, I will stand before the people tonight and warn them against those people who want to deprive the others of their rights (the question of rulership)."

'Abdur-Rahman said, "I said, 'O Chief of the believers! Do not do that, for the season of Hajj gathers the riff-raff and the rubble, and it will be they who will gather around you when you stand to address the people. And I am afraid that you will get up and say something, and some people will spread your statement and may not say what you have actually said and may not understand its meaning, and may interpret it incorrectly, so you should wait till you reach Medina, as it is the place of emigration and the place of Prophet's Traditions, and there you can come in touch with the learned and noble people, and tell them your ideas with confidence; and the learned people will understand your statement and put it in its proper place.'

On that, 'Umar said, 'By Allah! Allah willing, I will do this in the first speech I will deliver before the people in Medina." Ibn Abbas added: We reached Medina by the end of the month of Dhul-Hijja, and when it was Friday, we went quickly (to the mosque) as soon as the sun had declined, and I saw Sa'id bin Zaid bin 'Amr bin Nufail sitting at the corner of the pulpit, and I too sat close to him so that my knee was touching his knee, and after a short while 'Umar bin Al-Khattab came out, and when I saw him coming towards us, I said to Said bin Zaid bin 'Amr bin Nufail "Today 'Umar will say such a thing as he has never said since he was chosen as Caliph."

Said denied my statement with astonishment and said, "What thing do you expect 'Umar to say the like of which he has never said before?" In the meantime, 'Umar sat on the pulpit and when the callmakers for the prayer had finished their call, 'Umar stood up, and having glorified and praised Allah as He deserved, he said, "Now then, I am going to tell you something which (Allah) has written for me to say. I do not know; perhaps it portends my death, so whoever understands and remembers it, must narrate it to the others wherever his mount takes him, but if somebody is afraid that he does not understand it, then it is unlawful for him to tell lies about me. Allah sent Muhammad with the Truth and revealed the Holy Book to him, and among what Allah revealed, was the Verse of the Rajam (the stoning of married person (male & female) who commits illegal sexual intercourse, and we did recite this Verse and understood and memorized it. Allah's Apostle did carry out the punishment of stoning and so did we after him. I am afraid that after a long time has passed, somebody will say, 'By Allah, we do not find the Verse of the Rajam in Allah's Book,' and thus they will go astray by leaving an obligation which Allah has revealed.

And the punishment of the Rajam is to be inflicted to any married person (male & female), who commits illegal sexual intercourse, if the required evidence is available or there is conception or confession. And then we used to recite among the Verses in Allah's Book: 'O people! Do not claim to be the offspring of other than your fathers, as it is disbelief (unthankfulness) on your part that you claim to be the offspring of other than your real father.'

Then Allah's Apostle said, 'Do not praise me excessively as Jesus, son of Mary was praised, but call me Allah's Slave and His Apostles.' (O people!) I have been informed that a speaker amongst you says, 'By Allah, if 'Umar should die, I will give the pledge of allegiance to such-and-such person.' One should not deceive oneself by saying that the pledge of allegiance given to Abu Bakr was given suddenly and it was successful.

No doubt, it was like that, but Allah saved (the people) from its evil, and there is none among you who has the qualities of Abu Bakr . Remember that whoever gives the pledge of allegiance to anybody among you without consulting the other Muslims, neither that person, nor the person to whom the pledge of allegiance was given, are to be supported, lest they both should be killed.

And no doubt after the death of the Prophet we were informed that the Ansar disagreed with us and gathered in the shed of Bani Sa'da. 'Ali and Zubair and whoever was with them, opposed us, while the emigrants gathered with Abu Bakr. I said to Abu Bakr, 'Let's go to these Ansari brothers of ours.' So we set out seeking them, and when we approached them, two pious men of theirs met us and informed us of the final decision of the Ansar, and said, 'O group of Muhajirin (emigrants) ! Where are you going?' We replied, 'We are going to these Ansari brothers of ours.' They said to us, 'You shouldn't go near them. Carry out whatever we have already decided.' I said, 'By Allah, we will go to them.' And so we proceeded until we reached them at the shed of Bani Sa'da.

Behold! There was a man sitting amongst them and wrapped in something. I asked, 'Who is that man?' They said, 'He is Sa'd bin 'Ubada.' I asked, 'What is wrong with him?' They said, 'He is sick.' After we sat for a while, the Ansar's speaker said, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah,' and praising Allah as He deserved, he added, 'To proceed, we are Allah's Ansar (helpers) and the majority of the Muslim army, while you, the emigrants, are a small group and some people among you came with the intention of preventing us from practicing this matter (of caliphate) and depriving us of it.' When the speaker had finished, I intended to speak as I had prepared a speech which I liked and which I wanted to deliver in the presence of Abu Bakr, and I used to avoid provoking him. So, when I wanted to speak, Abu Bakr said, 'Wait a while.' I disliked to make him angry. So Abu Bakr himself gave a speech, and he was wiser and more patient than I. By Allah, he never missed a sentence that I liked in my own prepared speech, but he said the like of it or better than it spontaneously.

After a pause he said, 'O Ansar! You deserve all (the qualities that you have attributed to yourselves, but this question (of Caliphate) is only for the Quraish as they are the best of the Arabs as regards descent and home, and I am pleased to suggest that you choose either of these two men, so take the oath of allegiance to either of them as you wish. And then Abu Bakr held my hand and Abu Ubada bin Abdullah's hand who was sitting amongst us. I hated nothing of what he had said except that proposal,
for by Allah, I would rather have my neck chopped off as expiator for a sin than become the ruler of a nation, one of whose members is Abu Bakr , unless at the time of my death my own-self suggests something I don't feel at present.' And then one of the Ansar said, 'I am the pillar on which the camel with a skin disease (eczema) rubs itself to satisfy the itching (i.e., I am a noble), and I am as a high class palm tree! O Quraish.

There should be one ruler from us and one from you.' Then there was a hue and cry among the gathering and their voices rose so that I was afraid there might be great disagreement, so I said, 'O Abu Bakr! Hold your hand out.' He held his hand out and I pledged allegiance to him, and then all the emigrants gave the Pledge of allegiance and so did the Ansar afterwards . And so we became victorious over Sa'd bin Ubada (whom Al-Ansar wanted to make a ruler). One of the Ansar said, 'You have killed Sa'd bin Ubada.' I replied, 'Allah has killed Sa'd bin Ubada.' Umar added, "By Allah, apart from the great tragedy that had happened to us (i.e. the death of the Prophet), there was no greater problem than the allegiance pledged to Abu Bakr because we were afraid that if we left the people, they might give the Pledge of allegiance after us to one of their men, in which case we would have given them our consent for something against our real wish, or would have opposed them and caused great trouble . So if any person gives the Pledge of allegiance to somebody (to become a Caliph) without consulting the other Muslims, then the one he has selected should not be granted allegiance, lest both of them should be killed. "

Sahih al-Bukhari : Volume 8, Book 82, Number 817, also in al-Musnad: vol.1, Narration 391

So from what al-Farooq Omar [ra] said, we learn:

(1) There was no dispute as to the obligation to install a Caliph successding the Apostle of Allah [saw].

(2) The Khilafah must remain within Quraish "but this question (of Caliphate) is only for Quraish". The Ansaar [ra] did not accept it initially, but soon after they rushed to pledge the allegiance to a Qurashite, save Sa'd bin Ubadah [ra], he did not give his pledge.

There are many Sahih Traditions testify to what Abu Bakr As-Siddiq [ra] said, reported in Sahih al-Bukhari:
Narrated Ibn 'Umar:
Allah's Apostle said, "This matter (khilafah) will remain with Quraish even if only two of them were still existing."

Sahih al-Bukhari : Volume 9, Book 89, Number 254

Similar narrations are also quoted by Imam Muslim in his Sahih, and Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal in his al-Musnad.

(3) No man shall become a Caliph but by Bay'ah (pledge of allegiance): "so I said, 'O Abu Bakr! Hold your hand out.' He held his hand out and I pledged allegiance to him, and then all the emigrants gave the Pledge of allegiance and so did the Ansar afterwards".
Therefore, if the pledge was given, its fulfillment becomes obligatory. This is why he said: " we were afraid that if we left the people, they might give the Pledge of allegiance after us to one of their men, in which case we would have given them our consent for something against our real wish, or would have opposed them and caused a great trouble ".

It was also reported that the Messenger of Allah [saw] said:

Narrated AbuSa'id al-Khudri:
The Messenger of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) said: When oath of allegiance has been taken for two caliphs, kill the one for whom the oath was taken later.
Sahih Muslim : Book 19, Number 4568

The Messenger [saw] was also reported as saying:
Narrated Arfajah: I have heard the Messenger of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) say: Different evils will make their appearance in the near future. Anyone who tries to disrupt the affairs of this Ummah while they are united you should strike him with the sword whoever he be. (If remonstrance does not prevail with him and he does not desist from his disruptive activities, he is to be killed).

Sahih Muslim : Book 19, Number 4565

(4) If the fulfillment of the pledge is mandatory and obligatory, then there is no pledge without consulting the Muslims: " So if any person gives the Pledge of allegiance to somebody (to become a Caliph) without consulting the other Muslims, then the one he has selected should not be granted allegiance, lest both of them should be killed."

This is due to the concept of "Shura" (consulting) in Islam which is the very fundamental of governing and is based on two pillars: Justice, 4:58 ...And when ye judge between people that ye judge with justice.. and Consultation: 42:38 ..[W]ho (conduct) their affairs by mutual consultation..

(5) That the Bay'ah to Abu Bakr [ra] took place so fast and sudden, and without prearrangement, due to his status: " there is none among you who has the qualities of Abu Bakr." and "for by Allah, I would rather have my neck chopped off as expiator for a sin than become the ruler of a nation, one of whose members is Abu Bakr ".

Based on the said observations, the Jamhoor (majority) sat conditions to assume the Rightly Guided Khilafa: viz a viz to a man who is Just, from Quraish, by way of Bay'ah and Consultation.

As to the Ansaar, never after this event, did history inform us of any attempt on their part to assume the Khilafah

MashaaAllaah

@Op, after you have given us a beautiful DEFINITION of Imamah/Khilafah, you failed woefully to quote how Prophet himself, salallahu alayhi wa Ahli, announced his Khalifahs. Your polemic concern is just to prove either by hook or by crook that the first two khalifah of the Sunni were rightly appointed. Sorry you have a long way to go, boy.

# [size=15pt]HADITH KHALIFATAIN - NARRATIONS OF THE TWO CALIPHS[/size]

1. Imām al-Fasawī (d. 277 H) records:

‘Ubayd Allāh – Sharīk – al-Rukayn – Qāsim b. Ḥassān – Zayd b. Thābit:
The Messenger of Allāh, peace be upon him, said: “I am leaving behind over you MY KHALĪFAH: the Book of Allāh the Almighty and my offspring, my Ahl al-Bayt. Verily, both shall never separate from each other until they meet me at the Lake-Fount.”

Ref: {Abū Yūsuf Ya’qūb b. Sufyān al-Fasawī, al-Ma’rifah wa al-Tārīkh (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah) [annotator: Khalīl al-Manṣūr], vol. 1, p. 294}

2. Imam Ibn Abi Shaybah (d. 235 H):

Abū Dāwud ‘Umar b. Sa’d – Sharīk – al-Rukayn – al-Qāsim b. Ḥassān – Zayd b. Thābit – the Prophet:

“I have left behind over you the TWO ALL-COMPREHENSIVE KHALIFAHS: the Book of Allāh and my offspring. Verily, both shall never separate from each other until they meet me at the Lake-Fount.”

The annotators declare: The hadith is Sahih. It has Shawahid (witnesses).

Ref: Abū Bakr ‘Abd Allāh b. Abī Shaybah, Musnad Ibn Abī Shaybah (Riyādh: Dār al-Waṭan; 1st edition, 1418 H) [annotators: ‘Ādil b. Yūsuf al-‘Azāzī and Aḥmad b. Farīd al-Mazīdī], vol. 1, p. 108

3. Imam Ahmad (d. 241 H):

Abd Allāh (b. Aḥmad) – my father (Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal) – al-Aswad b. ‘Āmir – Sharīk – al-Rukayn – al-Qāsim b. Ḥassān – Zayd b. Thābit:

The Messenger of Allāh, peace be upon him, said, “I am leaving behind over you TWO KHALIFAHS: the Book of Allāh – a rope stretching between the heaven and the earth or from the heaven to the earth – and my offspring, my Ahl al-Bayt. Verily, both shall never separate from each other until they meet me at the Lake-Fount."

Ref: Abū ‘Abd Allāh Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal al-Shaybānī, Musnad (Cairo: Muasassat Qurṭubah [annotator: Shu’ayb al-Arnāūṭ], vol. 5, p. 181, # 21618

4. Imam Ibn Abi Asim (d. 287 H):

Abū Bakr – ‘Amr b. Sa’d Abū Dāwud al-Ḥafarī – Sharīk – al-Rukayn – al-Qāsim b. Ḥassān – Zayd b. Thābit:

The Messenger of Allāh, peace be upon him, said, “I am leaving behind over you the TWO KHALIFAHS after me: the Book of Allāh and my offspring, my Ahl al-Bayt. Verily, both shall never separate from each other until they meet me at the Lake-Fount.”

‘Allāmah al-Albānī (d. 1420 H) declares:

It is a ṣaḥīḥ ḥadīth. But, its chain is ḍa’īf due to the poor memory of Sharīk, and he was Ibn ‘Abd Allāh the Judge. Also, al-Qāsim b. Ḥassān is majhūl al-ḥāl (i.e. his status is unknown). The ḥadīth is recorded by Aḥmad (5/181-182, 189, and 190) through two other chains from Sharīk with it. I have only declared it ṣaḥīḥ because it has witnesses (shawāhid) that strengthen it.

Ref: Abū Bakr b. Abī ‘Āṣim, Aḥmad b. ‘Amr b. al-Ḍaḥḥāk b. Mukhlid al-Shaybānī, Kitāb al-Sunnah (al-Maktab al-Islāmī; 1st edition, 1400 H) [annotator: Muḥammad Nāṣir al-Dīn al-Albānī], vol. 2, pp. 350-351, # 754

5. Allamah Nasir Deen al-Albani also documents:

"I am leaving behind over you TWO KHALIFAHS; the Book of Allah - a rope stretching between the heaven and the earth - and my offspring, my Ahl alBayt. Verily, both shall never separate from each other until they meet me at the Lake-Fount."

Sheik al-Albani simply comments: * Sahih

Ref: {Sahih al-Jami al-Saghir wa Ziyadatuhu (Al-Maktab al-islami), vol. 1 p. 482, hadith no. 2457}

So Mr Newnas, based on these explicit Hadith Khalifatain, what does:

[1]. Khilafah of Quran and offspring of the Prophet meant?

[2]. Were Abu Bakr ibn Abi Quhafah, Umar b. al-Khattab and Uthman ibn Affan, were they part of Rasulullah's itrah - offspring to be Khalifahs after him?

AlBaqir:
So Mr Newnas, based on these explicit Hadith Khalifatain, what does:

[1]. Khilafah of Quran and offspring of the Prophet meant?

[2]. Were Abu Bakr ibn Abi Quhafah, Umar b. al-Khattab and Uthman ibn Affan, were they part of Rasulullah's itrah - offspring to be Khalifahs after him?

Even the dotard knows that there's no point for you in these narrations!
I'm really disappointed in you, just yesterday I was thinking; AlBaqir is a brilliant boy... if only he would repent!

But the pious predecessors (salaf) used to say; "anyone who stands by the sunnah will always have a share in Allah's promise to His Messenger alyhissolaat wassalaam "wa rafa'naa laka dhikrak" and anyone who deviates from it will always have a share in Allah's statement that "inna shaaniaka huwal abtar"!

That's why even the wisest of people begin to speak like mentally deprived individuals the moment they they decide to follow their desires instead of the truth!

Anyway, I'll -as I've always done- clarify these doubts for you, hoping that Allah makes it a means of repentance for you and also accepts it as an act of worship from me.

So calm down while I prepare and upload your refutation.

^You talk too much. Hadith Khalifatain is before you. What is your submission? Hadith Wilayah and Hadith Khalifah are on their way in sha Allah. Lets see how you fair on Hadith Khalifatain.

AlBaqir:
^You talk too much. Hadith Khalifatain is before you. What is your submission? Hadith Wilayah and Hadith Khalifah are on their way in sha Allah. Lets see how you fair on Hadith Khalifatain.

bismiLLaah wa solatu wa salam Alaa rosooliLLaah

Your response is in three phases.

Firstly, the hadiths are weak with this wording because they all evolve round Sharik who is weak in memory,

He is Sharik bn AbdiLLaah the judge.

Muhammad bn Yahya Al Qattaan reported from his father said; I saw some muddling in Sharik's reports.

AbdulJabbaar bn Muhammad said; I saI'd to Yahya bn Sa'eed; some people think Sharik only muddled reports in his last days (i.e old age). He (Yahya) replied; "he was always a muddler.

AbduLLah bn Mubaarak said; The hadiths of Sharik are nothing.
Aljurjaaniyy said; (Sharik is) poor in memory, muddled up reports.
Ibrahim bn Sa'eed alJawhariyy said; Sharik erred in four hundred reports.
(reference; meezanul i'tidaal volume 2 page 270)

Ibn Hajar summarize's it all in his taqreeb; sodooq(trustworthy) mukhti (errs). (taqreeb number; 2802)
So Sharik is religiously upright but has poor memory. (may Allah have mercy on him pardon me and him).

So why did Imam Albany authenticate it?
It's stated in your post; "because it has witnesses". But it's only the first part that has witness not the second part.
The Quran asks us to follow Allah and his messenger alyhissolaat wassalaam, and adds the scholars in some places, it adds the companions in other places.

So, the second part is weak.

Secondly;
Even if we accept that the hadith is authentic, it is not an evidence that khilafah, belongs to the ahl bayt only.
The text of the hadith points to that;
Now ponder; two khalifahs, The Quran and my progeny.

The meaning of khalifah here can't be caliphate because the Quran can't be a caliph or explain to me how Quran becomes king and wears crown or things like that.

So the meaning of khalifah hear is that we honour them and respect them. Because khalifah is a word that is used for whoever or whatever you leave behind after departing, not necessarily a ruler (see mu'jamul waseet pg 275 under root word kha lam and fa).

Thirdly,
You grab firmly a narration that is barely reliable and disregard several other clear-cut authentic narrations that mentioned the virtues of Abu Bakr and Umar .

Examples;
Follow those after me; Abu Bakr and Umar (tirmidhi; 3663) (Soheehah; 1233)

....but Allah and His messenger (alyhissolaat wassalaam) and the believers reject (anyone) except Abu Bakr. (Soheeh Muslim; Book of virtues of companions, chapter of virtues of Abu Bakr)

Lastly but definitely not the least;

The messenger of Allah alyhissolaat wassalaam said;

indeed the first of your religion is prophethood and mercy, then khalifah and mercy, then it will be kingship and oppression. (haythamiyy in alMujma' 5/189) Imam Suyooti said in tarikhul khulafa (published by darul ghaddil jadeed) pg 23 (hadith Hasan)

Definitely the first part mentioned here is the leadership of the Prophet Muhammad alyhissolaat wassalaam.

Then hadith is one of the signs of the Prophet's genuine prophethood. alyhissolaat wassalaam


The second part -group it anyway you like- includes the khilafah of Abu Bakr and Umar.
so they are bona-fide khalifah and the Messenger alyhissolaat wassalaam described them as merciful.

Now tell me why the Messenger didn't order Ali to the Solah..

Newnas:


bismiLLaah wa solatu wa salam Alaa rosooliLLaah

Your response is in three phases.

Firstly, the hadiths are weak with this wording because they all evolve round Sharik who is weak in memory,

He is Sharik bn AbdiLLaah the judge.

Muhammad bn Yahya Al Qattaan reported from his father said; I saw some muddling in Sharik's reports.

AbdulJabbaar bn Muhammad said; I saI'd to Yahya bn Sa'eed; some people think Sharik only muddled reports in his last days (i.e old age). He (Yahya) replied; "he was always a muddler.

AbduLLah bn Mubaarak said; The hadiths of Sharik are nothing.
Aljurjaaniyy said; (Sharik is) poor in memory, muddled up reports.
Ibrahim bn Sa'eed alJawhariyy said; Sharik erred in four hundred reports.
(reference; meezanul i'tidaal volume 2 page 270)

Ibn Hajar summarize's it all in his taqreeb; sodooq(trustworthy) mukhti (errs). (taqreeb number; 2802)
So Sharik is religiously upright but has poor memory. (may Allah have mercy on him pardon me and him).

So your criticism is on Sharik b. Abd Allah al-Nakha'i. Once he is exonerated, the hadith become authentic.

[size=15pt]ABOUT SHARIK b. ABD ALLAH AL-NAKHA'I[/size],

# Imām al-Mizzī (d. 742 H) submits:

"Al-Bukhārī uses him as a witness in al-Jāmi’ (i.e. Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī), and narrates from him under the Chapter “Raising both Hands in Ṣalāt” and others. Muslim too narrates from him in mutāba’āt (supporting narrations), and others rely upon him as a ḥujjah".

Ref: Jamāl al-Dīn Abū al-Ḥajjāj Yūsuf al-Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-Kamāl fī Asmā al-Rijāl (Beirut: Muasassat al-Risālah; 2nd edition, 1413 H), vol. 12, p. 475, # 2736

# Imām al-Dhahabī (d. 748 H) makes a similar statement about him:

"I (al-Dhahabī) say: Al-Bukhārī uses him as a witness, and Muslim narrates from him in mutāba’āt. Al-Nasāī and others rely upon him as a ḥujjah."

Ref: Shams al-Dīn Muḥammad b. Aḥmad b. ‘Uthmān al-Dhahabī, Tārīkh al-Islām wa Wafiyāt al-Mashāhīr wa al-A’lām (Beirut: Dār al-Kitāb al-‘Arabī; 1st edition, 1407 H) [annotator: Dr. ‘Umar ‘Abd al-Salām Tadmurī], vol. 11, p. 169

So, the overwhelming majority of classical Sunnī ḥadīth scientists considered him a ḥujjah in his own right. Meanwhile, Imām al-Ḥākim (d. 403 H) has a completely different view of Imām Muslim’s (d. 261 H) treatment of Sharīk. For instance, he states about a riwāyah:

"It has a shāhid (witness), which is upon the standard of Muslim, for he (Muslim) has relied upon Sharīk b. ‘Abd Allāh al-Nakha’ī as a ḥujjah."

Ref: Abū ‘Abd Allāh Muḥammad b. ‘Abd Allāh al-Ḥākim al-Naysābūrī, al-Mustadrak ‘alā al-Ṣaḥīḥayn (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-’Ilmiyyah; 1st edition, 1411 H) [annotator: Muṣtafā ‘Abd al-Qādir ‘Aṭā], vol. 1, p. 65, # 45

He repeats elsewhere:

"(Imām) Muslim has relied upon Sharīk b. ‘Abd Allāh as a ḥujjah, and he is to be relied upon as a ḥujjah."

Ref: ^Ibid, vol. 1, p. 193, # 377

And, again:

"It is gharīb ṣaḥīḥ, for Muslim has relied upon Sharīk b. ‘Abd Allāh has a ḥujjah.".93

Ref:^ Ibid, vol. 1, p. 539, # 1412

In simpler terms, the aḥādīth of Sharīk are ṣaḥīḥ upon the standard of Imām Muslim, according to al-Ḥākim! Al-Ḥāfiẓ, on his part, gives us some additional information about Sharīk, which may explain the reluctance of al-Bukhārī (d. 256 H) - and possibly Imām Muslim too - concerning his reports:

"Sharīk b. ‘Abd Allāh al-Nakha’ī al-Kūfī al-Qādī, (resided) first at Wāsiṭ and then Kūfah, Abū ‘Abd Allāh: Ṣadūq (very truthful), made a lot of mistakes. His memory deteriorated since he became the judge in Kūfah. He was just, excellent, a great worshipper of Allāh, and he was severe against the people of bid’ah."

Ref: Aḥmad b. ‘Alī b. Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī, Taqrīb al-Tahdhīb (Beirut: Dār al-Maktabah al-‘Ilmiyyah; 2nd edition, 1415 H) [annotator: Muṣtafā ‘Abd al-Qādir ‘Aṭā], vol. 1, p. 417, # 2795

He developed a memory problem when he became the judge of Kūfah. Before this period, he was a completely accurate narrator. However, Imām Ibn ‘Adī (d. 365 H) makes an important observation about him in this regard, which must be taken into consideration:

"The overwhelming majority of his aḥādīth are ṣaḥīḥ and accurate (from his shuyūkh). As for the repugnancy in his aḥādīth, that occurred only due to his poor memory"
Ref: Abū Aḥmad ‘Abd Allāh b. ‘Adī al-Jirjānī, al-Kāmil fī Ḍu’afā al-Rijāl (Dār al-Fikr li al-Ṭabā’at wa al-Nashr wa al-Tawzī’; 3rd edition, 1409 H), vol. 4, p. 22, # 888/8

This puts things into their proper perspective. Despite his memory problems, most of his aḥādīth are still ṣaḥīḥ and accurate. So, when it is said that he made “a lot” of mistakes, this was relative. His many mistakes affected only a small minority of his aḥādīth. To get a clearer picture, this is what Imām al-‘Ijlī (d. 261 H) states:

"Sharīk b. ‘Abd Allāh al-Nakha’ī, the judge, Kūfī: Thiqah (trustworthy), and he was ḥasan al-ḥadīth (i.e. his aḥādīth are ḥasan). The one who narrated most from him was Isḥāq b. Yūsuf al-Azraq al-Wāsiṭī. He heard 9000 (nine thousand) aḥādīth from him."

Ref: Abū al-Ḥasan Aḥmad b. ‘Abd Allāh b. Ṣāliḥ al-‘Ijlī al-Kūfī, Ma’rifat al-Thiqāt (Madīnah: Maktabah al-Dār; 1st edition, 1405 H), vol. 1, p. 453, # 727

Apparently, Sharīk was indeed a very prolific narrator. He narrated 9000 aḥādīth to Isḥāq alone! How many more then did he transmit to others? Obviously, there were more! Meanwhile, let us assume – for the sake of argument - that Sharīk narrated only those 9000 throughout his lifetime. So, in what percentage of them did he make mistakes due to his poor memory? Imām Ibn ‘Adī records the answer:

‘Umar b. Sinān narrated to us that he heard Ibrāhīm b. Sa’d al-Jawharī saying: “Sharīk made mistakes in 400 (four hundred) aḥādīth.”
Ref: Abū Aḥmad ‘Abd Allāh b. ‘Adī al-Jirjānī, al-Kāmil fī Ḍu’afā al-Rijāl (Dār al-Fikr li al-Ṭabā’at wa al-Nashr wa al-Tawzī’; 3rd edition, 1409 H), vol. 4, p. 8, # 888/8

In other words, Sharīk made mistakes – due to his poor memory - in 4 out of every 90 aḥādīth; and he authentically and accurately transmitted 86 out of every 90 aḥādīth from his shuyūkh. For Allāh’s sake, is this enough to call for his head and abandon all his aḥādīth as some from the Ahl al-Sunnah have done? What are all these bloated statements about him then?

This revelation obviously lays the exaggerations and the exaggerated positions concerning him to rest. His case was not as serious as some make it out to be. No wonder, most of the classical Sunnī ḥadīth collectors relied upon him as a ḥujjah in their books. Imām al-Dhahabī too concludes about him:

"I (al-Dhahabī) say: Sharīk was ḥasan al-ḥadīth (i.e. his aḥādīth are ḥasan). He was an Imām, a jurist, a prolific ḥadīth narrator. He was not as precise as Ḥammād b. Zayd. Al-Bukhārī has used him as a witness, Muslim has narrated mutāba’at reports from him, and Yaḥyā b. Ma’īn declared him thiqah (trustworthy) ... His aḥādīth are in the ḥasan categories"

Ref: Muḥammad b. Aḥmad b. ‘Uthmān al-Dhahabī, Tadhkirat al-Ḥuffāz (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah; 1st edition, 1419 H) [annotator: Zakariyyāh ‘Umayrāt], vol. 1, p. 170

# Imām al-‘Ijlī has a similar submission:

"Sharīk b. ‘Abd Allāh al-Nakha’ī, the judge, Kūfī: Thiqah (trustworthy), and he was ḥasan al-ḥadīth (i.e. his aḥādīth are ḥasan)."

Ref: Abū al-Ḥasan Aḥmad b. ‘Abd Allāh b. Ṣāliḥ al-‘Ijlī al-Kūfī, Ma’rifat al-Thiqāt (Madīnah: Maktabah al-Dār; 1st edition, 1405 H), vol. 1, p. 453, # 727

# Imām al-Haythamī (d. 807 H) also says

"It is entirely recorded by Aḥmad, and the narrators of the two reports are narrators of the Ṣaḥīḥ, except Sharīk b. ‘Abd Allāh al-Nakha’ī who is ḥasan al-ḥadīth (i.e. his aḥādīth are ḥasan)."

Ref: Nūr al-Dīn ‘Alī b. Abī Bakr al-Haythamī, Majma’ al-Zawāid (Beirut: Dār al-Fikr; 1412 H), vol. 9, p. 164, # 14712

So, Sharīk was a thiqah (trustworthy) narrator who made many mistakes in 4 out of every 90 of his aḥādīth. He was taken as a ḥujjah by most of the classical Sunnī ḥadīth collectors, including possibly Imām Muslim. However, due to his errors, his aḥādīth are only of the ḥasan grading, according to some top Sunnī ḥadīth scientists. In our humble view, making mistakes in 4 out of every 90 aḥādīth is not enough to degrade his aḥādīth from the level of ṣaḥīḥ reports or to reject them altogether as some Sunnīs do!

Newnas:

Secondly; Even if we accept that the hadith is authentic, it is not an evidence that khilafah, belongs to the ahl bayt only.
The text of the hadith points to that; Now ponder; two khalifahs, The Quran and my progeny.

The meaning of khalifah here can't be caliphate because the Quran can't be a caliph or explain to me how Quran becomes king and wears crown or things like that.

So the meaning of khalifah hear is that we honour them and respect them. Because khalifah is a word that is used for whoever or whatever you leave behind after departing, not necessarily a ruler (see mu'jamul waseet pg 275 under root word kha lam and fa).

Underlined statement VS bolded statement. What a contradiction. It only expose your thought against copy-pasted statement.
Hey yah! I can see the deep ignorance. Do you only honour and respect Quran but do not follow it? You want to "respect and honour" the Ahl al-bayt only but not ready to follow them.

Imam al-Mubarakfuri (d. 1282 H) quotes this under his commentary of hadith Thaqalain (second version of Hadith Khalifatain):

"Al-Qari said: 'The meaning of holding fast to them is to adhere to their love, to protect their honor, to follow their narrations, and to rely upon their opinions. This does not negate the taking of the Sunnah from other than them, due to his statement, peace be upon him, "My Sahabah are like the stars. Whichever of them you follow, you will be rightly guided" and due to His statement, Exalted be He: "Ask the people of al-Dhikr if you do not know." {[Tuhfat al-Ahwazi bi Sharh Jami al-Tirmidhi (Beirut: Dar al-kutub al-Illmiyyah; 1st edition, 1410 H), vol.10, p.196]}

Al-Qari apparently admits that Hadith Thaqalain commands the Ummah to follow the offspring of the Prophet after him. His argument however is that we should also follow the sahabah in addition to the Ahl al-bayt. There are two fatal problems with his submission:

# The hadith he is relying upon is unreliable. It is graded Mawdoo (fabricated) by al-Albani {[Silsilah al-Ahadith al-Da'ifah wa al-Mawdu'ah wa Atharihah al-Sayyiah fi al-Ummah (Riyadh: Dar al-Ma'arif; 1st edition, 1412 H), vol.1, p.144, #58]}

# Hadith Thaqalain (and hadith Khalifatain) addressed all mankind and that naturally included all the Sahabah.

Al-Mubarakfuri continues:

"Ibn al-Malik said: Adherence to the Book of Allah is to follow whatever is in it - and that is to follow the orders of Allah and desist from His prohibitions. The meaning of adherence to the offspring (of the Prophet) is to love them, and to seek guidance through their guidance and their way of life." Sayyid Jamal al-Din added, 'if it does not contradict the religion.'" [Ref:^ see previous ref for al-Mubarakfuri]}.

* Ibn al-Malik too concedes that the offspring of Muhammad must be followed, under Hadith Thaqalain. He makes no attempts to explain it away or fix artificial conditions. But, Sayyid Jamal al-Din moves a step forward: he could only follow the Ahl al-Bayt if their guidance or way of life did not contradict the religion! This weird opinion of Sayyid Jamal al-Din directly contradicts the explicit text of the riwayah:

"O mankind! I have left behind over you that which if you hold fast to it you will NEVER go astray: the Book of Allah and my offspring, my Ahl al-Bayt."

You will "never" go astray while following the Ahl al-Bayt. That is a clear guarantee from Allah and His Messenger.

..........................................


So both ahadith Thaqalain and Khalifatain (which are mutawatir anyway) destroyed the whatever hadith of Abu bakr this, Umar that. Observe, I have not at all post ahadith in support of Imam Ali ibn Abi Talib (alayhi Salam)'s Khilafah after the demise of the Prophet.

AlBaqir:


So your criticism is on Sharik b. Abd Allah al-Nakha'i. Once he is exonerated, the hadith become authentic.

[size=15pt]ABOUT SHARIK b. ABD ALLAH AL-NAKHA'I[/size],

# Imām al-Mizzī (d. 742 H) submits:

"Al-Bukhārī uses him as a witness in al-Jāmi’ (i.e. Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī), and narrates from him under the Chapter “Raising both Hands in Ṣalāt” and others. Muslim too narrates from him in mutāba’āt (supporting narrations), and others rely upon him as a ḥujjah".

Ref: Jamāl al-Dīn Abū al-Ḥajjāj Yūsuf al-Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-Kamāl fī Asmā al-Rijāl (Beirut: Muasassat al-Risālah; 2nd edition, 1413 H), vol. 12, p. 475, # 2736

# Imām al-Dhahabī (d. 748 H) makes a similar statement about him:

"I (al-Dhahabī) say: Al-Bukhārī uses him as a witness, and Muslim narrates from him in mutāba’āt. Al-Nasāī and others rely upon him as a ḥujjah."

Ref: Shams al-Dīn Muḥammad b. Aḥmad b. ‘Uthmān al-Dhahabī, Tārīkh al-Islām wa Wafiyāt al-Mashāhīr wa al-A’lām (Beirut: Dār al-Kitāb al-‘Arabī; 1st edition, 1407 H) [annotator: Dr. ‘Umar ‘Abd al-Salām Tadmurī], vol. 11, p. 169

So, the overwhelming majority of classical Sunnī ḥadīth scientists considered him a ḥujjah in his own right. Meanwhile, Imām al-Ḥākim (d. 403 H) has a completely different view of Imām Muslim’s (d. 261 H) treatment of Sharīk. For instance, he states about a riwāyah:

"It has a shāhid (witness), which is upon the standard of Muslim, for he (Muslim) has relied upon Sharīk b. ‘Abd Allāh al-Nakha’ī as a ḥujjah."

Ref: Abū ‘Abd Allāh Muḥammad b. ‘Abd Allāh al-Ḥākim al-Naysābūrī, al-Mustadrak ‘alā al-Ṣaḥīḥayn (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-’Ilmiyyah; 1st edition, 1411 H) [annotator: Muṣtafā ‘Abd al-Qādir ‘Aṭā], vol. 1, p. 65, # 45

He repeats elsewhere:

"(Imām) Muslim has relied upon Sharīk b. ‘Abd Allāh as a ḥujjah, and he is to be relied upon as a ḥujjah."

Ref: ^Ibid, vol. 1, p. 193, # 377

And, again:

"It is gharīb ṣaḥīḥ, for Muslim has relied upon Sharīk b. ‘Abd Allāh has a ḥujjah.".93

Ref:^ Ibid, vol. 1, p. 539, # 1412

In simpler terms, the aḥādīth of Sharīk are ṣaḥīḥ upon the standard of Imām Muslim, according to al-Ḥākim! Al-Ḥāfiẓ, on his part, gives us some additional information about Sharīk, which may explain the reluctance of al-Bukhārī (d. 256 H) - and possibly Imām Muslim too - concerning his reports:

"Sharīk b. ‘Abd Allāh al-Nakha’ī al-Kūfī al-Qādī, (resided) first at Wāsiṭ and then Kūfah, Abū ‘Abd Allāh: Ṣadūq (very truthful), made a lot of mistakes. His memory deteriorated since he became the judge in Kūfah. He was just, excellent, a great worshipper of Allāh, and he was severe against the people of bid’ah."

Ref: Aḥmad b. ‘Alī b. Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī, Taqrīb al-Tahdhīb (Beirut: Dār al-Maktabah al-‘Ilmiyyah; 2nd edition, 1415 H) [annotator: Muṣtafā ‘Abd al-Qādir ‘Aṭā], vol. 1, p. 417, # 2795

He developed a memory problem when he became the judge of Kūfah. Before this period, he was a completely accurate narrator. However, Imām Ibn ‘Adī (d. 365 H) makes an important observation about him in this regard, which must be taken into consideration:

"The overwhelming majority of his aḥādīth are ṣaḥīḥ and accurate (from his shuyūkh). As for the repugnancy in his aḥādīth, that occurred only due to his poor memory"
Ref: Abū Aḥmad ‘Abd Allāh b. ‘Adī al-Jirjānī, al-Kāmil fī Ḍu’afā al-Rijāl (Dār al-Fikr li al-Ṭabā’at wa al-Nashr wa al-Tawzī’; 3rd edition, 1409 H), vol. 4, p. 22, # 888/8

This puts things into their proper perspective. Despite his memory problems, most of his aḥādīth are still ṣaḥīḥ and accurate. So, when it is said that he made “a lot” of mistakes, this was relative. His many mistakes affected only a small minority of his aḥādīth. To get a clearer picture, this is what Imām al-‘Ijlī (d. 261 H) states:

"Sharīk b. ‘Abd Allāh al-Nakha’ī, the judge, Kūfī: Thiqah (trustworthy), and he was ḥasan al-ḥadīth (i.e. his aḥādīth are ḥasan). The one who narrated most from him was Isḥāq b. Yūsuf al-Azraq al-Wāsiṭī. He heard 9000 (nine thousand) aḥādīth from him."

Ref: Abū al-Ḥasan Aḥmad b. ‘Abd Allāh b. Ṣāliḥ al-‘Ijlī al-Kūfī, Ma’rifat al-Thiqāt (Madīnah: Maktabah al-Dār; 1st edition, 1405 H), vol. 1, p. 453, # 727

Apparently, Sharīk was indeed a very prolific narrator. He narrated 9000 aḥādīth to Isḥāq alone! How many more then did he transmit to others? Obviously, there were more! Meanwhile, let us assume – for the sake of argument - that Sharīk narrated only those 9000 throughout his lifetime. So, in what percentage of them did he make mistakes due to his poor memory? Imām Ibn ‘Adī records the answer:

‘Umar b. Sinān narrated to us that he heard Ibrāhīm b. Sa’d al-Jawharī saying: “Sharīk made mistakes in 400 (four hundred) aḥādīth.”
Ref: Abū Aḥmad ‘Abd Allāh b. ‘Adī al-Jirjānī, al-Kāmil fī Ḍu’afā al-Rijāl (Dār al-Fikr li al-Ṭabā’at wa al-Nashr wa al-Tawzī’; 3rd edition, 1409 H), vol. 4, p. 8, # 888/8

In other words, Sharīk made mistakes – due to his poor memory - in 4 out of every 90 aḥādīth; and he authentically and accurately transmitted 86 out of every 90 aḥādīth from his shuyūkh. For Allāh’s sake, is this enough to call for his head and abandon all his aḥādīth as some from the Ahl al-Sunnah have done? What are all these bloated statements about him then?

This revelation obviously lays the exaggerations and the exaggerated positions concerning him to rest. His case was not as serious as some make it out to be. No wonder, most of the classical Sunnī ḥadīth collectors relied upon him as a ḥujjah in their books. Imām al-Dhahabī too concludes about him:

"I (al-Dhahabī) say: Sharīk was ḥasan al-ḥadīth (i.e. his aḥādīth are ḥasan). He was an Imām, a jurist, a prolific ḥadīth narrator. He was not as precise as Ḥammād b. Zayd. Al-Bukhārī has used him as a witness, Muslim has narrated mutāba’at reports from him, and Yaḥyā b. Ma’īn declared him thiqah (trustworthy) ... His aḥādīth are in the ḥasan categories"

Ref: Muḥammad b. Aḥmad b. ‘Uthmān al-Dhahabī, Tadhkirat al-Ḥuffāz (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah; 1st edition, 1419 H) [annotator: Zakariyyāh ‘Umayrāt], vol. 1, p. 170

# Imām al-‘Ijlī has a similar submission:

"Sharīk b. ‘Abd Allāh al-Nakha’ī, the judge, Kūfī: Thiqah (trustworthy), and he was ḥasan al-ḥadīth (i.e. his aḥādīth are ḥasan)."

Ref: Abū al-Ḥasan Aḥmad b. ‘Abd Allāh b. Ṣāliḥ al-‘Ijlī al-Kūfī, Ma’rifat al-Thiqāt (Madīnah: Maktabah al-Dār; 1st edition, 1405 H), vol. 1, p. 453, # 727

# Imām al-Haythamī (d. 807 H) also says

"It is entirely recorded by Aḥmad, and the narrators of the two reports are narrators of the Ṣaḥīḥ, except Sharīk b. ‘Abd Allāh al-Nakha’ī who is ḥasan al-ḥadīth (i.e. his aḥādīth are ḥasan)."

Ref: Nūr al-Dīn ‘Alī b. Abī Bakr al-Haythamī, Majma’ al-Zawāid (Beirut: Dār al-Fikr; 1412 H), vol. 9, p. 164, # 14712

So, Sharīk was a thiqah (trustworthy) narrator who made many mistakes in 4 out of every 90 of his aḥādīth. He was taken as a ḥujjah by most of the classical Sunnī ḥadīth collectors, including possibly Imām Muslim. However, due to his errors, his aḥādīth are only of the ḥasan grading, according to some top Sunnī ḥadīth scientists. In our humble view, making mistakes in 4 out of every 90 aḥādīth is not enough to degrade his aḥādīth from the level of ṣaḥīḥ reports or to reject them altogether as some Sunnīs do!




Underlined statement VS bolded statement. What a contradiction. It only expose your thought against copy-pasted statement.
Hey yah! I can see the deep ignorance. Do you only honour and respect Quran but do not follow it? You want to "respect and honour" the Ahl al-bayt only but not ready to follow them.

Imam al-Mubarakfuri (d. 1282 H) quotes this under his commentary of hadith Thaqalain (second version of Hadith Khalifatain):

"Al-Qari said: 'The meaning of holding fast to them is to adhere to their love, to protect their honor, to follow their narrations, and to rely upon their opinions. This does not negate the taking of the Sunnah from other than them, due to his statement, peace be upon him, "My Sahabah are like the stars. Whichever of them you follow, you will be rightly guided" and due to His statement, Exalted be He: "Ask the people of al-Dhikr if you do not know." {[Tuhfat al-Ahwazi bi Sharh Jami al-Tirmidhi (Beirut: Dar al-kutub al-Illmiyyah; 1st edition, 1410 H), vol.10, p.196]}

Al-Qari apparently admits that Hadith Thaqalain commands the Ummah to follow the offspring of the Prophet after him. His argument however is that we should also follow the sahabah in addition to the Ahl al-bayt. There are two fatal problems with his submission:

# The hadith he is relying upon is unreliable. It is graded Mawdoo (fabricated) by al-Albani {[Silsilah al-Ahadith al-Da'ifah wa al-Mawdu'ah wa Atharihah al-Sayyiah fi al-Ummah (Riyadh: Dar al-Ma'arif; 1st edition, 1412 H), vol.1, p.144, #58]}

# Hadith Thaqalain (and hadith Khalifatain) addressed all mankind and that naturally included all the Sahabah.

Al-Mubarakfuri continues:

"Ibn al-Malik said: Adherence to the Book of Allah is to follow whatever is in it - and that is to follow the orders of Allah and desist from His prohibitions. The meaning of adherence to the offspring (of the Prophet) is to love them, and to seek guidance through their guidance and their way of life." Sayyid Jamal al-Din added, 'if it does not contradict the religion.'" [Ref:^ see previous ref for al-Mubarakfuri]}.

* Ibn al-Malik too concedes that the offspring of Muhammad must be followed, under Hadith Thaqalain. He makes no attempts to explain it away or fix artificial conditions. But, Sayyid Jamal al-Din moves a step forward: he could only follow the Ahl al-Bayt if their guidance or way of life did not contradict the religion! This weird opinion of Sayyid Jamal al-Din directly contradicts the explicit text of the riwayah:

"O mankind! I have left behind over you that which if you hold fast to it you will NEVER go astray: the Book of Allah and my offspring, my Ahl al-Bayt."

You will "never" go astray while following the Ahl al-Bayt. That is a clear guarantee from Allah and His Messenger.

..........................................


So both ahadith Thaqalain and Khalifatain (which are mutawatir anyway) destroyed the whatever hadith of Abu bakr this, Umar that. Observe, I have not at all post ahadith in support of Imam Ali ibn Abi Talib (alayhi Salam)'s Khilafah after the demise of the Prophet.

Enough of the gymnastics abeg!!!

You shot yourself in the foot. If only you would calm down and ponder on what you have posted, it's only an emphasis of my post.

Then the virtues of one person doesn't nullify the virtues of another person. The fact that Allah took Ibrahim -alyhissalam - as a khaleel (closest level of friendship) doesn't negate that the Prophet Muhammad alyhissolaat wassalaam is also a khaleel!

It is only a deviant that will change independent events to mutually exclusive events and vice versa just to suite his desires.

Then no one is infallible except Allah, even the Messenger alyhissolaat wassalaam erred. So everyone's commandment and obedience is still secondary to the Quran and sunnah.

The matter of Sharik is simple, he is religiously upright but has poor memory and muddled narrations up since he accepted the post of judge.

The case of people like this is clear to the student of hadith, you don't need the gymnastics you are doing!

# If we are able to prove that he reported the narration before he muddled, then we accept it.

# If we are sure that he reported it after muddling or we are uncertain about when he reported it, then we do not accept it unless we find someone else who is equal to him in memory or stronger then his report is strengthened to the level of Hasan lighayrihi.
This is only applicable if the fault in the reporter is his memory but if his fault is his religious uprightness then he remains weak.

This strengthening of narrators with another similar narrator is what is called mutaba'ah, i'tibaar, shaahid etc in the science of hadith.

But all the reports you quoted return to Sharik and have no other report to strengthen them.

Then hadith of someone like Sharik can't exceed the level of Hasan in fact it is Hasan lighayrihi not bithaatihi.

Secondly; The narrations of Abu Bakr and Umar are clear-cut authentic, the peak of authenticity, compiled by Bukharee and Muslim. And the Last verse of Surah fath and other similar verses on the virtues of the companions are a shaahid to those authentic narrations.

Then, Sheikh Mubarakpuri didn't interpret the narrations to mean caliphate or kingship rather he gave it the same meaning I gave it.
This type of virtue is not peculiar to the ahlul bayt rather several other companions have more explicit statements, didn't you see the report I quoted from mujma zawaaid of imam haythamiyy;

Be guided by those after me; Abu Bakr and Umar.

Clear and direct, and the other hadiths that you tried to sweep under the carpet!



Then ponder oh AlBaqir (may Allah soften your heart to repentance) the messenger said that those who have right to this khilafah are the Quraysh. Can't you see that the narrations that mentioned that the khilafah belongs to Quraysh are clear that it is not only the Prophet Muhammad's alyhissolaat wassalaam direct progeny that will be khalifah rather it is the clan of Quraysh.


Your last statement that one hadith destroyed some other, this is a ugly, deviant and weak statement. It's weakness is in two ways;

first; hadith don't destroy verses of the Quran or other hadiths, they are all from Allah the most Wise.

second; the hadith you are interpolating is just a single narration, that it's authenticity is much doubted but those ones of Abu Bakr and Umar are indisputably authentic and more in numbers. And you know the implication of this if you ever spent some time with the science of hadith.

Newnas:



[size=15pt]Then hadith of someone like Sharik can't exceed the level of Hasan in fact it is Hasan lighayrihi[/size] not bithaatihi.

In short, the hadith is no longer Da'if as you erroneously submitted before. And like al-Albani says, "The hadith is sahih because of its shawahids".
The implication of these hadiths is "you don't belong to offspring of Messenger of Allah , you have nothing to do with Khilafah." Period!

Newnas:


Then, Sheikh Mubarakpuri didn't interpret the narrations to mean caliphate or kingship rather he gave it the same meaning I gave it.
This type of virtue is not peculiar to the ahlul bayt rather several other companions have more explicit statements, didn't you see the report I quoted from mujma zawaaid of imam haythamiyy;

@underlined, which is to "love and respect" them only and not to follow them?! Perhaps you want to read again with pair of spectacles
It is only from Nawasib like you that "Khalifatain (Two Caliphs) and Thaqalain (Two Weighty things)" in Quran and offspring of the Prophet, does not mean Caliph, leadership rather just respect. How wouldn't it be when the two mutawatir hadith destroyed the genuineness of your manhaj.

[size=15pt]Hadith as-Salat[/size]

Imam al-Bukhari (d. 256 H) documents:

Abd al-Raḥman b. Abī Laylī: Ka’b b. ‘Ujrah met me and said, “Shall I not give you a present I got from the Prophet, peace be upon him?” I said, “Yes, give it to me.” He said, “We asked the Messenger of Allāh, peace be upon him, and said, ‘O Messenger of Allāh! What is the manner of the ṣalāt upon you, Ahl al-Bayt, for Allāh has taught us how to send salām you (Ahl al-Bayt)?’

He replied, ‘Say: O Allāh! Send ṣalāt upon Muḥammad and upon the family of Muḥammad, in exactly the same manner as You sent ṣalāt upon Ibrāhīm and upon the family of Ibrāhīm. You are the Most Praiseworthy, the Most Glorious. O Allāh! Bless Muḥammad and the family of Muḥammad, in exactly the same manner as You blessed Ibrāhīm and the family of Ibrāhīm. You are the Most Praiseworthy, the Most Glorious.’”

Ref: al-Jāmi’ al-Ṣaḥīḥ al-Mukhtaṣar (Beirut: Dār Ibn Kathīr; 3rd edition, 1407 H) [annotator: Dr. Muṣṭafā Dīb al-Baghā], vol. 3, p. 1233, # 3190

NB: This hadith is Mutawattir no doubt.

Interestingly both Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman and all the Sahabah engaged in this salawat sherif.

HOW DOES ALLAH BLESSED NABI IBRAHIM AND HIS AHL AL-BAYT THAT THE EXACT SAME BLESSINGS IS FOR MUHAMMAD AND HIS AHL AL-BAYT?!

1. Preference over mankind
"Verily, Allāh chose Ādam, Nūḥ, the family of Ibrāhīm and the family of Imrān above the worlds. (They are) offspring, one of the other, and Allāh is the All-Hearing, All-Knowing. {Aal-Imran: 33-34}

Concerning an offspring of Nabi Ibrahim, Allah says:

"And indeed, We gave the offspring of Isrāīl the Book, and authority and prophethood, and We provided them with good things, AND WE MADE THEM SUPERIOR ABOVE THE WORLDS.{Quran 45:16}

Imam al-Bukhari documents the Tafsir of this ayat Sherif:

"Verily, Allāh chose Ādam, Nūḥ, the family of Ibrāhīm and the family of Imrān above the worlds ... Allāh provides sustenance to whom He wills, without limit.} Ibn ‘Abbās said: “{and the family of Imrān} They are the believers from the family of Ibrāhīm, the family of ‘Imrān, the family of Yāsīn AND THE FAMILY OF MUḤAMMAD, peace be upon him. He (Allāh) says: {Verily, the most entitled to Ibrāhīm are those who followed him} They are the believers."

Ref: al-Jāmi’ al-Ṣaḥīḥ al-Mukhtaṣar (Beirut: Dār Ibn Kathīr; 3rd edition, 1407 H) [annotator: Dr. Muṣṭafā Dīb al-Baghā], vol. 3, p. 1263

So, Mr Newnas how can Abu Bakr and Umar ever be the leader of Ahli Muhammad when Allah has prefer and choose them above mankind?

2. Imam of mankind

"And when Ibrāhīm was tried by his Lord with some statements, and he fulfilled them, He said, "I will appoint you an Imām OF MANKIND.” He (Ibrāhīm) asked, “And of my offspring?” He (Allāh) replied, “My Covenant shall not reach the wrongdoers {al-Baqarah: 124}


Imam Ibn Kathir (d. 774 H) writes:

"Allāh the Most High says: {And when Ibrāhīm was tried by his Lord with some statements, and he fulfilled them, He said, “I will appoint you an Imām of mankind.” He (Ibrāhīm) asked, “And of my offspring?” He (Allāh) replied, “My Covenant shall not reach the wrong-doers.”} When he fulfilled the huge obligations which his Lord commanded him with, he appointed him the Imām of mankind, whom they must follow, and whose guidance they must copy. He requested Allāh that this Imāmah be connected with his lineage, and be uninterrupted within his offspring, and be perpetual forever among his offspring. So, what he asked WAS GRANTED, and he was granted full authority of Imāmah, and the wrong-doers were excluded from its reach, and it was made exclusive to the righteous scholars among his offspring."

Ref: Abū al-Fidā Ismā’īl b. Kathīr, Qiṣaṣ al-Anbiyā (Dār al-Kutub al-Ḥadīthah; 1st edition, 1388 H) [annotator: Muṣṭafā ‘Abd al-Wāḥid], vol. 1, p. 232; al-Bidāyah wa al-Nihāyah (Dār Iḥyā al-Turāth al-‘Arabī; 1st edition, 1408 H) [annotator: ‘Alī Shīrī], vol. 1, p. 191

Mr Newnas, was Abu Bakr and Umar part of Muhammad's offspring, Ahl al-Bayt to qualify for the same Imamah granted to Ibrahim and his offspring?

3. al-Hikmah and authority

"We have granted the Book and the Ḥikmah to the family of Ibrāhīm, and We gave them a great kingdom{surah an-Nasa: 54}

"They are those whom We gave the Book, the authority, and prophethood" ({Quran 6:89}

AlBaqir:
[size=15pt]Hadith as-Salat[/size]

Imam al-Bukhari (d. 256 H) documents:

Abd al-Raḥman b. Abī Laylī: Ka’b b. ‘Ujrah met me and said, “Shall I not give you a present I got from the Prophet, peace be upon him?” I said, “Yes, give it to me.” He said, “We asked the Messenger of Allāh, peace be upon him, and said, ‘O Messenger of Allāh! What is the manner of the ṣalāt upon you, Ahl al-Bayt, for Allāh has taught us how to send salām you (Ahl al-Bayt)?’

He replied, ‘Say: O Allāh! Send ṣalāt upon Muḥammad and upon the family of Muḥammad, in exactly the same manner as You sent ṣalāt upon Ibrāhīm and upon the family of Ibrāhīm. You are the Most Praiseworthy, the Most Glorious. O Allāh! Bless Muḥammad and the family of Muḥammad, in exactly the same manner as You blessed Ibrāhīm and the family of Ibrāhīm. You are the Most Praiseworthy, the Most Glorious.’”

Ref: al-Jāmi’ al-Ṣaḥīḥ al-Mukhtaṣar (Beirut: Dār Ibn Kathīr; 3rd edition, 1407 H) [annotator: Dr. Muṣṭafā Dīb al-Baghā], vol. 3, p. 1233, # 3190

NB: This hadith is Mutawattir no doubt.

Interestingly both Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman and all the Sahabah engaged in this salawat sherif.

HOW DOES ALLAH BLESSED NABI IBRAHIM AND HIS AHL AL-BAYT THAT THE EXACT SAME BLESSINGS IS FOR MUHAMMAD AND HIS AHL AL-BAYT?!

1. Preference over mankind
"Verily, Allāh chose Ādam, Nūḥ, the family of Ibrāhīm and the family of Imrān above the worlds. (They are) offspring, one of the other, and Allāh is the All-Hearing, All-Knowing. {Aal-Imran: 33-34}

Concerning an offspring of Nabi Ibrahim, Allah says:

"And indeed, We gave the offspring of Isrāīl the Book, and authority and prophethood, and We provided them with good things, AND WE MADE THEM SUPERIOR ABOVE THE WORLDS.{Quran 45:16}

Imam al-Bukhari documents the Tafsir of this ayat Sherif:

"Verily, Allāh chose Ādam, Nūḥ, the family of Ibrāhīm and the family of Imrān above the worlds ... Allāh provides sustenance to whom He wills, without limit.} Ibn ‘Abbās said: “{and the family of Imrān} They are the believers from the family of Ibrāhīm, the family of ‘Imrān, the family of Yāsīn AND THE FAMILY OF MUḤAMMAD, peace be upon him. He (Allāh) says: {Verily, the most entitled to Ibrāhīm are those who followed him} They are the believers."

Ref: al-Jāmi’ al-Ṣaḥīḥ al-Mukhtaṣar (Beirut: Dār Ibn Kathīr; 3rd edition, 1407 H) [annotator: Dr. Muṣṭafā Dīb al-Baghā], vol. 3, p. 1263

So, Mr Newnas how can Abu Bakr and Umar ever be the leader of Ahli Muhammad when Allah has prefer and choose them above mankind?

2. Imam of mankind

"And when Ibrāhīm was tried by his Lord with some statements, and he fulfilled them, He said, "I will appoint you an Imām OF MANKIND.” He (Ibrāhīm) asked, “And of my offspring?” He (Allāh) replied, “My Covenant shall not reach the wrongdoers {al-Baqarah: 124}


Imam Ibn Kathir (d. 774 H) writes:

"Allāh the Most High says: {And when Ibrāhīm was tried by his Lord with some statements, and he fulfilled them, He said, “I will appoint you an Imām of mankind.” He (Ibrāhīm) asked, “And of my offspring?” He (Allāh) replied, “My Covenant shall not reach the wrong-doers.”} When he fulfilled the huge obligations which his Lord commanded him with, he appointed him the Imām of mankind, whom they must follow, and whose guidance they must copy. He requested Allāh that this Imāmah be connected with his lineage, and be uninterrupted within his offspring, and be perpetual forever among his offspring. So, what he asked WAS GRANTED, and he was granted full authority of Imāmah, and the wrong-doers were excluded from its reach, and it was made exclusive to the righteous scholars among his offspring."

Ref: Abū al-Fidā Ismā’īl b. Kathīr, Qiṣaṣ al-Anbiyā (Dār al-Kutub al-Ḥadīthah; 1st edition, 1388 H) [annotator: Muṣṭafā ‘Abd al-Wāḥid], vol. 1, p. 232; al-Bidāyah wa al-Nihāyah (Dār Iḥyā al-Turāth al-‘Arabī; 1st edition, 1408 H) [annotator: ‘Alī Shīrī], vol. 1, p. 191

Mr Newnas, was Abu Bakr and Umar part of Muhammad's offspring, Ahl al-Bayt to qualify for the same Imamah granted to Ibrahim and his offspring?

3. al-Hikmah and authority

"We have granted the Book and the Ḥikmah to the family of Ibrāhīm, and We gave them a great kingdom{surah an-Nasa: 54}

"They are those whom We gave the Book, the authority, and prophethood" ({Quran 6:89}

Don't you know that Abu Bakr and Umar from Quraysh clan? And Quraysh clan are from the progeny of Ismail the son of Ibrahim (Allah's khaleel) alyhimassalam.

So they also have a share in those virtues.

And besides, Allah gives his authority to whom he wills.

Newnas:


Don't you know that Abu Bakr and Umar from Quraysh clan? And Quraysh clan are from the progeny of Ismail the son of Ibrahim (Allah's khaleel) alyhimassalam.

So they also have a share in those virtues.

So, you mean Salat Ibrahimiyyah that All sahabah including Abu Bakr and Umar did is for Abu Bakr and Umar also, along with all the Quraysh clan?! You mean Abu Bakr and Umar were also choosed above mankind?! You mean Allah made them Imam over mankind?! You mean Allah gave them hikmah and authority?!

I can clearly see your desperation. Please do not pull such stunt again. Prophet emphatically introduced his Ahl al-Bayt to be Ali, Hassan, Hussein and Fatima with their offspring. I do not know how Abu Bakr and Umar suddenly came from Ahli Muhammad. Wonder shall never end.
I have given you hadith sahih in Sahih al-Bukhari from Ibn Abbas under the Tafsir of ayah 33-34 of surah Aal Imran.

In fact none of your Shuyukh of old or present has ever make such a reckless argument.

Newnas:


And besides, Allah gives his authority to whom he wills.

Ma sha Allah. That's why He says the Imamah is His covenant and it will never reach the transgressors. Apart from the fact that none of them were from the progeny (itrah) of Muhammad, I will remind you that your candidates were Mushrikun for years before and after Islam until they both submit (one early and the other one later). Besides, Umar b. al-Khattab confessed he DOUBTED the Nubuwah of Muhammad at Hudaybiyah, and severally he never stop running away from Battlefields.

AlBaqir:


So, you mean Salat Ibrahimiyyah that All sahabah including Abu Bakr and Umar did is for Abu Bakr and Umar also, along with all the Quraysh clan?! You mean Abu Bakr and Umar were also choosed above mankind?! You mean Allah made them Imam over mankind?! You mean Allah gave them hikmah and authority?!

I can clearly see your desperation. Please do not pull such stunt again. Prophet emphatically introduced his Ahl al-Bayt to be Ali, Hassan, Hussein and Fatima with their offspring. I do not know how Abu Bakr and Umar suddenly came from Ahli Muhammad. Wonder shall never end.
I have given you hadith sahih in Sahih al-Bukhari from Ibn Abbas under the Tafsir of ayah 33-34 of surah Aal Imran.

In fact none of your Shuyukh of old or present has ever make such a reckless argument.



Ma sha Allah. That's why He says the Imamah is His covenant and it will never reach the transgressors. Apart from the fact that none of them were from the progeny (itrah) of Muhammad, I will remind you that your candidates were Mushrikun for years before and after Islam until they both submit (one early and the other one later). Besides, Umar b. al-Khattab confessed he DOUBTED the Nubuwah of Muhammad at Hudaybiyah, and severally he never stop running away from Battlefields.

You are seriously showing signs of desperation because you have no tangible point again, so you just jump from one argument to another. May Allah guide you.

Do you find it hard to believe that they are part of the family of Ibrahim? please see your books of history, biography and lineages!

Didn't Allah make them Imam?! He made them khalifah of the Prophet alyhissolaat wassalaam after his demise! And the believers followed them and are still following them! So stop the hating. So if you say they are wrongdoers then you are either accusing Allah of ignorance or mistake by making them Imam.


As for other members of Quraysh clan, if they are righteous then they will also have a share in it. Don't you see that Allah's messenger alyhissolaat wassalaam said that the khalifah belongs to Quraysh.

And I didn't say that they are from Prophet Muhammad alyhissolaat wassalaam progeny, I said they are from Ibrahim's progeny. so don't muddle up the issue.

Then, as I explained to you earlier today, that the fact that a person has a virtue doesn't mean that another person can't have the same virtue or perhaps greater virtue.

The fact that Ibrahim was made an imam doesn't mean that another person can't be imam! Prophet Nooh, he came before Ibrahim, is he not an Imam?! So what's your point?

And even people who are not prophets but are simply righteous slaves of Allah can be Imam. Ponder on the following verse;

Allah described the slaves of Rahman thus;

Surah Al-Furqan, Verse 74:
وَالَّذِينَ يَقُولُونَ رَبَّنَا هَبْ لَنَا مِنْ أَزْوَاجِنَا وَذُرِّيَّاتِنَا قُرَّةَ أَعْيُنٍ وَاجْعَلْنَا لِلْمُتَّقِينَ إِمَامًا

And those who say: "Our Lord! Bestow on us from our wives and our offspring who will be the comfort of our eyes, and make us leaders for the Muttaqun" (pious - see V. 2:2 and the footnote of V. 3:164)."
(English - Mohsin Khan)

via iQuran

So being imam is not restricted to Ibrahim and his progeny alone.

So, Allah promised to make Ibrahim an Imam, but he asked Allah to make take imam from his progeny also. So how does that restrict the imam to Ibrahim and his progeny?

^Its like I need to increase the font size of hadith salat for you.

Say: O Allāh! Send ṣalāt upon [size=15pt]Muḥammad and upon the family of Muḥammad[/size], in exactly the same manner as You sent ṣalāt upon Ibrāhīm and upon the family of Ibrāhīm. You are the Most Praiseworthy, the Most Glorious. O Allāh! [size=15pt]Bless Muḥammad and the family of Muḥammad[/size], in exactly the same manner as You blessed Ibrāhīm and the family of Ibrāhīm. You are the Most Praiseworthy, the Most Glorious.’”

How was Abu Bakr and Umar ever belong to Ahli Muhammad? Simple question!

# What exactly do you think we are discussing here? It is the legitimacy and illegitimacy of your historical Khulafau. Do you know Sahih Bukhari documented that Ali and his supporters did not recognize the Khilafah of Abu Bakr until six months when he noticed people were having animosity towards him? And you need to show us where Ali ever paid allegiance to Umar and Uthman. In fact according to Sahih Muslim, Imam Ali (alayhi Salam) used to thought them (Abu Bakr and Umar) as TRAITOR, SINFUL, TREACHEROUS person for declaring themselves as WALI of the prophet after his demise.

THE TRUE WALI OF THE PROPHET

Imam Ibn 'Asim (d. 287H) records:

Husayn b. Ali and Ahmad b. Uthman - Muhammad b. Khalid b. Athmah - Musa b. Ya'qub - al-Muhajir b. Mismar - Aishah bint Sa'd - her father:

"I heard the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, saying on the day of al-Juhfah while holding the hand of Ali, and he delivered a sermon, and thanked Allah and praised Him, and then said: "O Mankind! I AM YOUR WALI'. They replied, "You have said the truth, O Messenger of Allah." Then he held the hand of Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, and raised it up, and said, "THIS (ALI) IS MY WALI, AND THE ONE TO DISCHARGE ON MY BEHALF"

Allamah al -Albani says: It is Sahih (authentic) because it has shawahid.

Ref: {Kitab al-Sunnah (al-Maktab al-Islami; 1st edition, 1410 H)[annotator: Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani], vol.2, p.565,#1189}.

NB: There are lots of hadith of this genre. It is however a waste of time posting them since you are even dishonest to previous ahadith.

# Unfortunately, what do we have after the demise of the Prophet? Abu Bakr and Umar claimed what never belonged to them.

Imam Muslim records Umar ibn al-khattab saying:

"When the Messenger of Allāh, peace be upon him, died, Abū Bakr said: “I am the WALI of the Messenger of Allāh, peace be upon him.”.... So both of you ('Alī and 'Abbās) thought him (i.e. Abū Bakr) to be a liar, sinful, A TRAITOR and dishonest. And Allāh knows that he was really truthful, pious, rightly-guided and a follower of the truth. Abū Bakr died and I became the WALI of the Messenger of Allāh, peace be upon him, and the walī of Abū Bakr. So both of you thought me to be a liar, sinful, A TRAITOR and dishonest."

Ref: {Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim (Beirut: Dār Iḥyā al-Turāth al-'Arabī), vol. 3, p. 1376, #1757}.

AlBaqir:
THE TRUE WALI OF THE PROPHET

Imam Ibn 'Asim (d. 287H) records:

Husayn b. Ali and Ahmad b. Uthman - Muhammad b. Khalid b. Athmah - Musa b. Ya'qub - al-Muhajir b. Mismar - Aishah bint Sa'd - her father:

"I heard the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, saying on the day of al-Juhfah while holding the hand of Ali, and he delivered a sermon, and thanked Allah and praised Him, and then said: "O Mankind! I AM YOUR WALI'. They replied, "You have said the truth, O Messenger of Allah." Then he held the hand of Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, and raised it up, and said, "THIS (ALI) IS MY WALI, AND THE ONE TO DISCHARGE ON MY BEHALF"

Allamah al -Albani says: It is Sahih (authentic) because it has shawahid.

Ref: {Kitab al-Sunnah (al-Maktab al-Islami; 1st edition, 1410 H)[annotator: Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani], vol.2, p.565,#1189}.

NB: There are lots of hadith of this genre. It is however a waste of time posting them since you are even dishonest to previous ahadith.

# Unfortunately, what do we have after the demise of the Prophet? Abu Bakr and Umar claimed what never belonged to them.

Imam Muslim records Umar ibn al-khattab saying:

"When the Messenger of Allāh, peace be upon him, died, Abū Bakr said: “I am the WALI of the Messenger of Allāh, peace be upon him.”.... So both of you ('Alī and 'Abbās) thought him (i.e. Abū Bakr) to be a liar, sinful, A TRAITOR and dishonest. And Allāh knows that he was really truthful, pious, rightly-guided and a follower of the truth. Abū Bakr died and I became the WALI of the Messenger of Allāh, peace be upon him, and the walī of Abū Bakr. So both of you thought me to be a liar, sinful, A TRAITOR and dishonest."

Ref: {Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim (Beirut: Dār Iḥyā al-Turāth al-'Arabī), vol. 3, p. 1376, #1757}.

You have raised two points today and I thrashed them. And you -consciously or unconsciously - accepted defeat.
That is why you are fleeing to another hadith to distort.

I'll attend to you tomorrow, in shaa Allah

Newnas:


You have raised two points today and I thrashed them. And you -consciously or unconsciously - accepted defeat.
That is why you are fleeing to another hadith to distort.

I'll attend to you tomorrow, in shaa Allah

Am sorry man, Albaqir doesn't engage in win or lose dialogue. I can see all you can ever think of is "I cant or will not be defeated". This kind of attitude blocks person's insight and thereafter you become a fanatic. How many things you have either denied or not ready to accept correction in several course of our dialogue?! Whoever is influenced and driving by such is an ignorant fool.

"Words such as losers, winners and other such western and materialistic words and expressions should not be used. If we enter the arena for the sake of God and for carrying out our responsibilities, then wining and losing are meaningless" {Ayatullah sayyid Ali Khamenei (r.a)}

"We should adopt a truth-based outlook towards all matters, not a biased, lustful and business-like one. We should look at all matters with a vision of supporting the Truth. THIS IS HOW OUR HEARTS GET CLOSE TO GOD"
{Sayyid Ali Khamenei}

NB: If I ever dialogue with you or anybody else, it is not primarily because of that very person. Always remember the spectators (viewers) are much more than the two debaters.

WA Salam.

AlBaqir:


Am sorry man, Albaqir doesn't engage in win or lose dialogue. I can see all you can ever think of is "I cant or will not be defeated". This kind of attitude blocks person's insight and thereafter you become a fanatic. How many things you have either denied or not ready to accept correction in several course of our dialogue?! Whoever is influenced and driving by such is an ignorant fool.

"Words such as losers, winners and other such western and materialistic words and expressions should not be used. If we enter the arena for the sake of God and for carrying out our responsibilities, then wining and losing are meaningless" {Ayatullah sayyid Ali Khamenei (r.a)}

"We should adopt a truth-based outlook towards all matters, not a biased, lustful and business-like one. We should look at all matters with a vision of supporting the Truth. THIS IS HOW OUR HEARTS GET CLOSE TO GOD"
{Sayyid Ali Khamenei}

NB: If I ever dialogue with you or anybody else, it is not primarily because of that very person. Always remember the spectators (viewers) are much more than the two debaters.

WA Salam.

Such a horrible interpretation!

If not because of my fear that some innocent people might fall into your misguidance, I wouldn't even give thrash you post a second thought.

I have always stated my goal, and it is your repentance.

I exposed the weakness of your religion and told you how you retreated from one feeble line of defense to another. Instead of you to admit the falsehood of your path, you just pull another stunt of arrogance.

This is not the first time you are pulling such stunts.

The earlier you repent the better for you. That's my final advice for you.

Then your quote from Ali Khameni, why don't you reference it? you don't want to mention your shia books do that more of your misguidances won't be exposed!

Newnas:


I exposed the weakness of your religion and told you how you retreated from one feeble line of defense to another. Instead of you to admit the falsehood of your path, you just pull another stunt of arrogance.

This is not the first time you are pulling such stunts.

Boy! You have this foul languages and boastful attitudes upon ignorance. And such is usually influenced by intolerance and fanaticism. Where is your "good manners, good exhortations and sound argument" as regard to Quranic instructions on dialogue? Interestingly some of your brothers in faith have cautioned you yet you are unrepentant.

Then I wonder:

# What exactly of my "religion" you have ever attempted not to mention of your fanciful "exposition"?

# What exactly is "retreating from one feeble line of defense to another"?

On this thread, we dialogue on Imamah. You submitted your arguments in favor of your Khulafau. In that regard I challenged you with Hadith Khalifatain. You pull some stunt to weaken the hadith but you failed and at the end submitted the hadith is Hasan. Seeing the danger, you weirdly and "nasibily" concluded that "Khalifas" in that hadith does not mean Caliph who succeed a person as against your initial definition of "Khalifah, Imam", of someone or something that replace a person. This alone exposed your desperation, and I have no help for you there.

Furthermore, I present to you Hadith Salat. Here we explore from the glorious Quran the salat and barakat upon Nabi Ibrahim and his offspring. Preference over mankind, Imamah over mankind, Authority and wisdom were among many salat and barakat which Allah gave to Nabi Ibrahim and his offspring. These exact the same are what Muhammad and his offspring were blessed with. Again, the nasibism in you made you weirdly and recklessly spew unimaginable comment: That "Abu Bakr and Umar, and all Qurayshi clans" were also part of it.

Here I helped you increase the font size of Hadith as-Salat and asked you if your candidates were ever part of Ahli Muhammad (Muhammad's progeny)?!

While you dodged the thunderbolt, I gave you Hadith wilayah. Just a peep of it. All you can result to is foul languages, fanciful boasting of "winner oh oh winner"!

AlBaqir:


[s]Boy! You have this foul languages and boastful attitudes upon ignorance. And such is usually influenced by intolerance and fanaticism. Where is your "good manners, good exhortations and sound argument" as regard to Quranic instructions on dialogue? Interestingly some of your brothers in faith have cautioned you yet you are unrepentant.

Then I wonder:

# What exactly of my "religion" you have ever attempted not to mention of your fanciful "exposition"?

# What exactly is "retreating from one feeble line of defense to another"?

On this thread, we dialogue on Imamah. You submitted your arguments in favor of your Khulafau. In that regard I challenged you with Hadith Khalifatain. You pull some stunt to weaken the hadith but you failed and at the end submitted the hadith is Hasan. Seeing the danger, [size=16]you weirdly and "nasibily" [/size] concluded that "Khalifas" in that hadith does not mean Caliph who succeed a person as against your initial definition of "Khalifah, Imam", of someone or something that replace a person. This alone exposed your desperation, and I have no help for you there.

Furthermore, I present to you Hadith Salat. Here we explore from the glorious Quran the salat and barakat upon Nabi Ibrahim and his offspring. Preference over mankind, Imamah over mankind, Authority and wisdom were among many salat and barakat which Allah gave to Nabi Ibrahim and his offspring. These exact the same are what Muhammad and his offspring were blessed with.
Again, [size=16]the nasibism in you [/size] made you weirdly and recklessly spew unimaginable comment: That "Abu Bakr and Umar, and all Qurayshi clans" were also part of it.

Here I helped you increase the font size of Hadith as-Salat and asked you if your candidates were ever part of Ahli Muhammad (Muhammad's progeny)?!

While you dodged the thunderbolt, I gave you Hadith wilayah. Just a peep of it. All you can result to is foul languages, fanciful boasting of "winner oh oh winner"!

[/s]

Read

www.nairaland.com/3057330/between-two-extremes-sheikh-solih#44843885


Surah Al-Baqara, Verse 143:
وَكَذَٰلِكَ جَعَلْنَاكُمْ أُمَّةً وَسَطًا لِّتَكُونُوا شُهَدَاءَ عَلَى النَّاسِ وَيَكُونَ الرَّسُولُ عَلَيْكُمْ شَهِيدًا وَمَا جَعَلْنَا الْقِبْلَةَ الَّتِي كُنتَ عَلَيْهَا إِلَّا لِنَعْلَمَ مَن يَتَّبِعُ الرَّسُولَ مِمَّن يَنقَلِبُ عَلَىٰ عَقِبَيْهِ وَإِن كَانَتْ لَكَبِيرَةً إِلَّا عَلَى الَّذِينَ هَدَى اللَّهُ وَمَا كَانَ اللَّهُ لِيُضِيعَ إِيمَانَكُمْ إِنَّ اللَّهَ بِالنَّاسِ لَرَءُوفٌ رَّحِيمٌ

Thus, have We made of you an Ummat (nation) justly balanced, that ye might be witnesses over the nations, and the Messenger a witness over yourselves; and We appointed the Qibla to which thou wast used, only to test those who followed the Messenger from those who would turn on their heels (From the Faith). Indeed it was (A change) momentous, except to those guided by Allah. And never would Allah Make your faith of no effect. For Allah is to all people Most surely full of kindness, Most Merciful.
(English - Yusuf Ali)

via iQuran

Double post

Newnas:
...."It was said: O Apostle of Allah, Who should be installed as a leader after you? He said: If you install Abu Bakr, you will find him honest, ascetic in this life and desirious of the Hereafter. If you install Omar, you will find him strong, honest, fearing in Allah no one's blame. If you install Ali, and I don't think you will, you will find him guided, guiding you to the straight path."

Musnad al-Imam Ahmad: vol.2, narration 859

@Bold, what weird fabrication attributed to Rasul 'Azam, salallahu alayhi wa ahli. Such is the style and sign of Nasibism.

[size=15pt]HADITH KHALIFAH[/size]

# Imam Ibn Asim (d. 287) documents:

Muḥammad b. al-Muthannā – Yaḥyā b. Ḥammād – Abū ‘Awānah – Yaḥyā b. Salīm Abū Balj – ‘Amr b. Maymūn – Ibn ‘Abbās:

"The Messenger of Allah (s) said to 'Ali: "You are to me of the STATUS of Harun to Musa, with the EXCEPTION that you are not a prophet. [size=15pt]And you are MY KHALIFAH OVER EVERY BELIEVER AFTER ME[/size]."

Dr. Al-Jawabirah says: Its chain is Hasan

Ref: {'Kitab al-Sunnah (Dar al-Sami'i li al-Nahr wa al-Tawhi) [annotator: Dr. Al-Jawabirah], vol. 1, p. 799 - 800, #1222}

# 'Allamah al-Albani also comments: Its chain is hasan (sound).

Ref: {Kitab Sunnah (al-Maktab al-Islami; 1st Edition, 1400H) [annotator: Nasir deen al-Albani], vol. 2, p. 565, #1188

# Imam al-Hakim (d. 403H) declares: This hadith has a SAHIH chain.
Ref: {Al-Mustadrak ala al-Sahihayn, vol. 3, p. 143, #4652}

* Imam al-Dhahabi (d. 748H) concurs with Imam al-Hakim: SAHIH (authentic).

# Allamah Ahmad Shakir: Its Chain is sahih
Ref: {Musnad Imam Ahmad (Dar alHadith, 1416H) [annotator: Ahmad Shakir] vol. 1, p. 331, #3062}

# Imam al-Busiri (d. 840H): A sahih chain
Ref: {Itihaf al-khiyarah al-Maharah bi Zawaid al-Masanid al-'Ashara, vol. 7, p. 184, #6630

[29:47] "We have revealed the Book to you. Some of the People of the Book and some of the pagans also believe in it. No one knowingly denies Our revelations except the infidels"

AlBaqir:


@Bold, what weird fabrication attributed to Rasul 'Azam, salallahu alayhi wa ahli. Such is the style and sign of Nasibism.

[size=15pt]HADITH KHALIFAH[/size]

# Imam Ibn Asim (d. 287) documents:

[s]Muḥammad b. al-Muthannā – Yaḥyā b. Ḥammād – Abū ‘Awānah – Yaḥyā b. Salīm Abū Balj – ‘Amr b. Maymūn – Ibn ‘Abbās:

"The Messenger of Allah (s) said to 'Ali: "You are to me of the STATUS of Harun to Musa, with the EXCEPTION that you are not a prophet. [size=15pt]And you are MY KHALIFAH OVER EVERY BELIEVER AFTER ME[/size]."

Dr. Al-Jawabirah says: Its chain is Hasan

Ref: {'Kitab al-Sunnah (Dar al-Sami'i li al-Nahr wa al-Tawhi) [annotator: Dr. Al-Jawabirah], vol. 1, p. 799 - 800, #1222}

# 'Allamah al-Albani also comments: Its chain is hasan (sound).

Ref: {Kitab Sunnah (al-Maktab al-Islami; 1st Edition, 1400H) [annotator: Nasir deen al-Albani], vol. 2, p. 565, #1188

# Imam al-Hakim (d. 403H) declares: This hadith has a SAHIH chain.
Ref: {Al-Mustadrak ala al-Sahihayn, vol. 3, p. 143, #4652}

* Imam al-Dhahabi (d. 748H) concurs with Imam al-Hakim: SAHIH (authentic).

# Allamah Ahmad Shakir: Its Chain is sahih
Ref: {Musnad Imam Ahmad (Dar alHadith, 1416H) [annotator: Ahmad Shakir] vol. 1, p. 331, #3062}

# Imam al-Busiri (d. 840H): A sahih chain
Ref: {Itihaf al-khiyarah al-Maharah bi Zawaid al-Masanid al-'Ashara, vol. 7, p. 184, #6630

[29:47] "We have revealed the Book to you. Some of the People of the Book and some of the pagans also believe in it. No one knowingly denies Our revelations except the infidels"

[/s]

You shaa like trouble.

I've read the explanation of the hadith in fathul Baari of Imam Ibn Hajar a long time ago. The narration is not even close to supporting your misguidance.

I'm done with you already, you shia are a confirmed heretic. This is not unknown to anyone on Nairaland so there's no need wasting my time with you.

I can only pray and hope for your repentance.

My advice to you, get a hobby! Typing long and unimpressively boring posts is an ugly hobby!!!

Newnas:
[/s]

You shaa like trouble.

I've read the explanation of the hadith in fathul Baari of Imam Ibn Hajar a long time ago. The narration is not even close to supporting your misguidance.

I'm done with you already, you shia are a confirmed heretic. This is not unknown to anyone on Nairaland so there's no need wasting my time with you.

I can only pray and hope for your repentance.

My advice to you, get a hobby! Typing long and unimpressively boring posts is an ugly hobby!!!

A typical nasibi